About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
: in the book, jim write of preparing opening questions for the 1992 three-way debate between george h.w. bush, bill clinton, and ross pero. >> i will ask questions for the first half under rules that permit. >> to get things going he wanted to question along the same line apples to apples for the candidates. this one time, kate was on a book tour so they stalked by phone not long before the start of the debate. >> lehrer: i called kate and ran through those three questions and there was dead silence on the phone. and i thought uh-oh. i really don't need this. i said, okay, what is it?" i was not terribly polite about it. and she said, "well, you have two apples and an owner." that was one of the hardest calls i ever made. i knew he was in his zone. he felt really good about his questions. he was really up. and that's a split-second decision. as he says in the book, he called me back to tell me by the time he got there that i'd been right and it was okay. in the meantime, i got aanda, our youngest daughter, and i said we've got to go for a walk. we've got to go for a walk. we got out, and iç
changes or not his position. but the conversation changed because with george w. bush, he was for immigration reform with a path to citizenship. immediately after that we got the rejection that would have given two million students the possibility of staying. then it was replicated in alabama and georgia. so instead of discussing the possibility of what to do with 11 million undocumented immigrants, here we have incredibly tough laws on immigrations and the approach changed completely. nowadays we're discussing only dream map probably or defer action by president barack obama when the conversation should have been much, much wider. >> i remember ronald regan was quite positive about immigration. he was quite pro hispanic. he gave amnesty the 3 million. >> yes. republicans were doing great. as you know, reagan used to say that latinos are republicans, they just don't know it. >> well, he did say that. he did say you have common values in regard to the family, to religion. >> abortion. >> abortion. issues on that. >> gay marriage. they're very conservative. that's basically
many more lives and fighting so much useless battles. that was the disaster of the george w. bush administration. seems like romney is intent on taking us straight back to that. tavis: if he were sitting in the moderator's chair to run morrowt your political ideology aside, what do think the american people need to here with the issues that matter to it and the issues that you write about in "the price of civilization", and what would you like to see the two of them go at it? what would you like to see front and center tomorrow night in this conversation? what kinds of questions would you deposing to them? >> of course, the most important issue for the american people is how we are going to create sustainable and fair and equitable recovery, a recovery that and really embraces all of the people including people who are very poor and are hurting. so i would ask mitt romney how in the midst of all of this, when we do not begin to have the revenues that we need when we are collecting the smallest share of our national income in taxes since the 1940's, why mr. romney, do you propose a
wrong in a debate with george w. bush in 2000. you can see gore advancing threatening toward the bush who would later win the presidency after a battle over vote counting. i cannot imagine anything like that happening tonight. in fact, the opposite. these are very cool customers. how should they loosened up without making that mistake? >> al gore had the unfortunate personality -- he resembled a tin woodman when he was in front of the camera. i cannot believe that his approaching president bush was as big a deal as some would think that it was. but, he did it at the wrong time. >> right. very very briefly. these are two of the most televised men in the world. will we learn anything new about them? >> tonight's candidates, i think that we will. the way that they behave, the way they present themselves will make a significant difference. >> i will have to stop you there. thank you very much indeed for joining me. that brings us to the end of the show. thank you very much for watching. we will see you back here tomorrow. >> make sense of international news at bbc.com/news. >> funding for
to do that. george w. bush was not able to impose a similar level of sanctions. it took obama going out there and saying that he would meet with the iranians. that allowed him to form his coalition. i do not -- i really am waiting for mitt romney to lay out specifics on how you would be different than obama. >> how did he talk about what happened in benghazi and the death of the ambassador without seeming to exploit it? >> he sort of said obama botched the response to benghazi. frankly, his first response was not the best response. he botched his first response in terms of coming out swinging, politicizing it to soon. there is a hesitancy for him to politicize it again. there is this window opening for mitt romney and he wants to take it. you can say the administration dropped the ball, they did not anticipate the terrorist attack, they left americans vulnerable. >> there is no mention to of president george bush. why is that legacy avoided? >> there is a real debate within the camp. there is a kind of -- you do not know where he stands. in some places, he has a former bush advisers who
. >> sreenivasan: this doctor was the medicare medicaid chief under president george w. bush. he now heads the health policy center at the brookings institution and sees merit in romney's ideas. >> they could move towards innovative ways of delivering care like doing more to provide nursing home type services at home, like doing more to prevent the the complications of conditions like asthma by sending nurses to patients' homes and helping them modify the home to prevent the emergency room visit. >> sreenivasan: governor romney has not spelled out whether he would allow local officials to deny medicaid to some current patients altogether or restrict health benefits they now receive. romney also says he would not have medicaid spending keep pace with projected health care inflation. in the all likelihood, a romney administration also would not provide additional funds to cover more recipients during a recession. in contrast to how the law curntly works. president obama argues that romney's proposal would cut coverage and services to the needy including seniors. >> here's the deal the states
's a critically important point and one having troubled with george w. bush in 2000-2004 and going to places along the gold coast or the red neck riveria whatever you want to call it in florida where there are new areas of republican voters, we would fly somewhere or go on a bus for two hours and say why are we here and carl row will say republican registration is this and we'll pump it up to this. dave talks about florida. if we can get 59% hispanic votes or over 60 there's no way romney can win the state of florida if we tweaked the hispanic vote to that number. these successful campaigns are doing exactly what johns talking about. they know exactly where their voters are, they know how to dial up certain demographic groups to tweak the final number in that state. the obama team is obsessed with that. >> it is one of the advantages they have that cuts against all of this other stuff. >> rose: can he overcome that murphy. >> i'm recently reformed political consultant so nobody believes more in the gadget than i do. it's a little overrated like all processed things. when you have the incumbent a
an election, i mean the only one you can really argue that did was george w. bush and alore in 2000, even gerald ford a story people like to tell, ford fell more behind before the debate that doesn't mean the debates couldn't be a decider in this election, of course they could, but i think we should to into it with fairly low expectations of how much they will move the polls until we see otherwise. >> rose: exactly. point well-taken. on the other hand, one of the things that was beginning to creep in was this was not winnable, i don't think people came out of last night thinking it wasn't winnable, do you? >> i agree. >> i think in a macro sense of three big things he accomplished, he, for a good long while, at least for the next debate he eliminated this concern among republicans this thing isn't winnable. and two is, i think he showed people what he is like. >> rose: right. >> more than he ever had. he didn't do it at the convention well enough, it is hard to do in fizzing, it is hard to do even on this program, because the audience, the prepressure of the debate i think he really did a
nations general assembly, when he had choice words to describe then- president george w. bush. >> ( translated ): this podium where it is now my turn to speak still smells of sulfur! yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, at this same rostrum, mr. president of the united states was here, the one i call the devil. >> suarez: with president obama, he's has been less hostile, but no less theatrical, this week confidently saying the two would vote for each other in their respective contests. >> ( translated ): if i were american, i would vote for obama. and i think if obama was from here, from barlovento or from some neighborhood in caracas, he would vote for chavez. i am sure of it. >> suarez: yet he's continued to thwart american efforts on a range of international issues, such as washington's attempt to convince iran's president mahmoud ahmadinejad to halt his country's pursuit of nuclear weapons. and he's stymied efforts to remove syria's president, bashar al-assad, by being an ally to the regime at the united nations and providing vital fuel to power assad's crackdown. indeed, as a
in the obama administration. and peter feaver served on the national security council staff during the george w. bush administration. he's now a professor of political science and public policy at duke university. we thank you both for being with us. peter feaver, to you first. we heard governor romney today criticize the president broadly for not rejecting strongly enough america's influence in the world. yet when it came to specifics, we didn't hear many details. so let me just ask you about a couple of different places in the world. what about when it comes to iran. what exactly governor romney be doing differently right now? >> well, this is the criticism that the obama campaign has leveled at the romney campaign for not being detailed and specific enough. when it comes to iran, the president hasn't laid out a red line that he said clearly he would enforce. when asked to be precise about what it means for iran not to possess a nuclear weapon, the articulation of the red line, he's been vague and says he doesn't want to parse it further. i think there's a certain element of ambiguity about w
george w. bush for 9/11. well, some people do. some people say he had a warning he should have been paying more attention to al qaeda. i suppose. if you want to make both claims then you're at least being consistent. but you can't say that 9/11 was a sucker punch when -- but we should have known everything about what was going to happen around the embassy in libya. doesn't wash. >> rose: you travel around the world, you were in china recently. what do the leaders of other countries think about america today? what do they want that they don't see? what do they see that they like? >> yeah. good question. hard to generalize, charlie. it would depend region to region. you know, right now it seems to me that -- i don't sense a big clamor around and about america today. >> rose: right. >> rose: >> if you look at the world, everyone's so internally focused charlie. china's internally focused on its problems, the european union is internally focused on its problems, russia's -- putin's trying to stay ahead of the democratic revolution in his own country. this is not a big foreign policy mom
language? one of the thinks we remember is the way al exwoar crowded george w. bush and gave him the look or the way someone sighed, the way the two relate standing next to each other. did you get anything watching that? >> i'm not sure there will be a moment easy to repeat over and over again in the next several days, television shows. i do think romney looked aggressive, maybe a little over-aggressive, a bulldozer, kept going, kept going. i thought if maybe there was a slight advantage, at certain times the president looked a little peefd, a little stiff, maybe, but i wouldn't say there was a big difference between the two. >> woodruff: how did you see it? >> i thought romney didn't know when to take the foot off the pedal a couple of times. he just kept going. >> woodruff: he wanted to have the last word. >> he did want to have the last word. i thought he looked more comfortable. and i thought he seemed more comfortable, and i think the president didn't seem nearly as happy to be there as did mitt romney. >> woodruff: did-- when all is said and done, are the two of you saying you think
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)